Reply #104: Thanks for your valid points

[WildEyedLiberal]

He is really between a rock and a hard place on this. I don't think he's done dealing with the aftermath of election 2004, personally. I think the reason he didn't react the way you described is because he's a prosecutor, and it is his nature to fully assemble his case before pressing charges. I don't think he's finished with looking into 2004; I think he just wants to get all his ducks in a row before anything can be done. And he might not even attempt to be on center stage about it anyway - I don't have any inside dirt, but knowing John Kerry, I simply do not believe he just shrugged his shoulders and thought "well, that's it." I can understand your point of view, though I do feel like it is more prudent to assemble a foolproof case, even if it is a year or more after the fact, and drive the stake through their heart, than to have raised a fuss initially and run the risk of getting derailed from the start.

But as much as I still believe in Kerry, this is as much about us as about him; more us about us, really. Yes, he was robbed, but we were robbed too. I think he is doing what he can, but that's why I love seeing posts like yours - the more people working on this issue to put the puzzle pieces together, the better.